41 CFR Appendix A to Subpart C of Part 102-3
Key Points and Principles
June 9, 2020
This appendix provides additional guidance in the form of answers to frequently asked questions and identifies key points and principles that may be applied to situations not covered elsewhere in this subpart. The guidance follows:
Open Table
| Key points and principles | Section | Question(s) | Guidance |
|---|---|---|---|
| I. FACA does not specify the manner in which advisory committee members and staff must be appointed | 102-3.105, 102-3.130(a) | 1. Does the appointment of an advisory committee member necessarily result in a lengthy process? | A. No. Each agency head may specify those policies and procedures, consistent with the Act and this part, or other specific authorizing statute, governing the appointment of advisory committee members and staff. |
| B. Some factors that affect how long the appointment process takes include: (i) Solicitation of nominations; (ii) Conflict of interest clearances; (iii) Security or background evaluations; (iv) Availability of candidates; and (v) Other statutory or administrative requirements. | |||
| C. In addition, the extent to which agency heads have delegated responsibility for selecting members varies from agency to agency and may become an important factor in the time it takes to finalize the advisory committee's membership. | |||
| II. Agency heads retain the final authority for selecting advisory committee members, unless otherwise provided for by a specific statute or Presidential directive | 102-3.130(a) | 1. Can an agency head select for membership on an advisory committee from among nominations submitted by an organization? | A. The answer to question 1 is yes. Organizations may propose for membership individuals to represent them on an advisory committee. However, the agency head establishing the advisory committee, or other appointing authority, retains the final authority for selecting all members. |
| 2. If so, can different persons represent the organization at different meetings? | B. The answer to question 2 also is yes. Alternates may represent an appointed member with the approval of the establishing agency, where the agency head is the appointing authority. | ||
| III. An agency may compensate advisory committee members and staff, and also employ experts and consultants | 102-3.130(d), 102-3.130(e), 102-3.130(g) | 1. May members and staff be compensated for their service or duties on an advisory committee? 2. Are the guidelines the same for compensating both members and staff? 3. May experts and consultants be employed to perform other advisory committee work? |
A. The answer to question 1 is yes. (i) However, FACA limits compensation for advisory committee members and staff to the rate for level IV of the Executive Schedule, unless higher rates expressly are allowed by other statutes. (ii) Although FACA provides for compensation guidelines, the Act does not require an agency to compensate its advisory committee members. |
| B. The answer to question 2 is no. The guidelines for compensating members and staff are similar, but not identical. For example, the differences are that: (i) An agency “may” pay members on either an hourly or a daily rate basis, and “may not” provide additional compensation in any form, such as bonuses or premium pay; while (ii) An agency “must” pay staff on an hourly rate basis only, and “may” provide additional compensation, so long as aggregate compensation paid in a calendar year does not exceed the rate for level IV of the Executive Schedule, with appropriate proration for a partial calendar year. | |||
| C. The answer to question 3 is yes. Other work not part of the duties of advisory committee members or staff may be performed by experts and consultants. For additional guidance on the employment of experts and consultants, agencies should consult the applicable regulations issued by the U. S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM). (See 5 CFR part 304.) | |||
| IV. Agency heads are responsible for ensuring that the interests and affiliations of advisory committee members are reviewed for conformance with applicable conflict of interest statutes and other Federal ethics rules. | 102-3.105(h) | 1. Are all advisory committee members subject to conflict of interest statutes and other Federal ethics rules? 2. Who should be consulted for guidance on the proper application of Federal ethics rules to advisory committee members? |
A. The answer to question 1 is no. Whether an advisory committee member is subject to Federal ethics rules is dependent on the member's status. The determination of a member's status on an advisory committee is largely a personnel classification matter for the appointing agency. Most advisory committee members will serve either as a “representative” or a “special Government employee” (SGE), based on the role the member will play. In general, SGEs are covered by regulations issued by the U. S. Office of Government Ethics (OGE) and certain conflict of interest statutes, while representatives are not subject to these ethics requirements. |
| B. The answer to question 2 is the agency's Designated Agency Ethics Official (DAEO), who should be consulted prior to appointing members to an advisory committee in order to apply Federal ethics rules properly. | |||
| V. An agency head may delegate responsibility for appointing a Committee Management Officer (CMO) or Designated Federal Officer (DFO); however, there may be only one CMO for each agency. | 102-3.105(c), 102-3.105(i) | 1. Must an agency's CMO and each advisory committee DFO be appointed by the agency head? | A. The answer to question 1 is no. The agency head may delegate responsibility for appointing the CMO and DFOs. However, these appointments, including alternate selections, should be documented consistent with the agency's policies and procedures. |
| 2. May an agency have more than one CMO? | B. The answer to question 2 also is no. The functions of the CMO are specified in the Act and include oversight responsibility for all advisory committees within the agency. Accordingly, only one CMO may be appointed to perform these functions. The agency may, however, create additional positions, including those in its subcomponents, which are subordinate to the CMO's agencywide responsibilities and functions. | ||
| VI. FACA is the principal statute pertaining to advisory committees. However, other statutes may impact their use and operations. | 102-3.125(c) | 1. Do other statutes or regulations affect the way an agency carries out its advisory committee management program? | A. Yes. While the Act provides a general framework for managing advisory committees Governmentwide, other factors may affect how advisory committees are managed. These include: (i) The statutory or Presidential authority used to establish an advisory committee; (ii) A statutory limitation placed on an agency regarding its annual expenditures for advisory committees; (iii) Presidential or agency management directives; (iv) The applicability of conflict of interest statutes and other Federal ethics rules; (v) Agency regulations affecting advisory committees; and (vi) Other requirements imposed by statute or regulation on an agency or its programs, such as those governing the employment of experts and consultants or the management of Federal records. |
Tried the LawStack mobile app?
Join thousands and try LawStack mobile for FREE today.
- Carry the law offline, wherever you go.
- Download CFR, USC, rules, and state law to your mobile device.
